S21 - Developing State Specific SPFs - LTC2013

LADOTD
Developing State
Specific SPFs
DiExSys, LLC
Jake Kononov, Ph.D., P.E.
Bryan K. Allery, P.E.
LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013
Why do we need
Safety Performance Functions?
These Examples Illustrate Why
Accident Rate is
the Most Common
Measure of Safety
Rate =
#Acc x 1,000,000
AADT x 365 x Length
Lets Examine Its Application
Year
1988
1989
1990
1991
# Acc
13
11
13
23
AADT
2,900
2,900
3,050
3,400
Average Rate = 2.28
Gambling Introduced In 1992
After Gambling
Year
1992
1993
1994
1995
# Acc
30
30
36
40
AADT
10,618
13,200
14,300
13,900
Rate
1.33
1.07
1.19
1.36
Average Rate = 1.24

Rate
2.11
1.79
2.01
3.19
Before Gambling
Average Rate = 2.28
Highway Alignment and Typical CrossSection have not Changed
After Gambling
Average Rate = 1.24
After the Introduction of Gambling,

the % of Accident Involving
Alcohol increased 500%.
Is Drinking and Driving in Concert
with Gambling Good for Safety?
Probably not, but if Accident Rates
are Used as a Measuring Device
One Would have to Conclude that
it is.
C-470
Platte Canyon
MP 15.44
1990
58 Crashes
36,010 AADT
I-25
MP 26.21
2004
308 Crashes
77,682 AADT
Platte Canyon
MP 15.44
I-25
MP 26.21
Between 1990 and 2004

AADT Increased from 36,010 to 77,682
1990
2004
Total Accident
Rate
Increased
by 146%
58 Crashes
308 Crashes
36,010 AADT
77,682 AADT
Injury and Fatal Rate Increased by 60%
Clearly the Rate is Changing with

AADT
In Order to Understand how the Crash

Rate is Changing, we need to
Develop a Relationship between
Safety and Traffic Exposure
This Relationship is Reflected by,

Safety Performance Function
(SPF)
Calibration of Safety
Performance Functions
in Rural and Urban
Environments
DiExSys, LLC
Dataset Preparation
Rural Mountainous
2-Lane Highway
LOSS/SPF Graph
Rural 2-Lane Highway

14
12
10
APMPY
0
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
AADT
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000

14
12
10
APMPY
0
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
AADT
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000

14
1.5
12
10
APMPY
1.5
14,000 AADT Corresponds to

An Expected Accident Frequency of
8 Accidents Per Mile Per Year
0
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
AADT
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
Segment 1
Segment 2
Segment 3
Urban 6-Lane Freeway

SPF Graph

160
140
120
Each Point Represents

Accident Frequency for
a Segment of Roadway
for a Single Year
APMPY
100
80
60
40
20
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
AADT
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000

160
140
Fit a Curve to the Data

Using Neural Networks
120
APMPY
100
Mean
80
60
40
20
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
AADT
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000

160
140
1.5
120
APMPY
100
Mean
80
60
40
20
0
20,000
1.5
130,000 AADT Corresponds to

An Expected Accident Frequency of
60 Accidents Per Mile Per Year
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
AADT
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
California 6-Lane Freeway
California 8-Lane Freeway
Texas 8-Lane Freeway
CO6L (Total)
APMPY (Total)
120
100
Rate
56 Acc 1,000,000 1.28acc / mvmt

120,0003651
APMPY
80
60
40
20
0
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
AADT
160,000
180,000
200,000
The Following Assumptions Typical of the Urban Freeway

Environment were used to Estimate LOS Boundaries:
DHV (Design Hourly Volume) =10 % of AADT for AADT <130,000

DHV (Design Hourly Volume)=8% of AADT for AADT>130,000
PHF (Peak Hour Factor) = 0.9
%Truck during peak period = 2%
Terrain Level
Lane Width = 12 ft
Shoulder Width > 6 ft
Interchange spacing =1 Interchange/Mile
Simulation
High Speed
Low Density
High Speed
High Density
Travel at 70 mph
Travel at 69 mph
CO6L (Total)
APMPY (Total)
120
Sub-Critical Zone
Transitional Zone
Super-Critical Zone
100
APMPY
80
Super-Critical Density
d > 45 pc/mi/ln
v < 52 mph
60
40
d = 16 pc/mi/ln
v = 70 mph
20
0
40,000
Critical Density
d = 24 pc/mi/ln
v = 69 mph
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
AADT
Sigmoid Or Dose-Response Curve

180,000
200,000
Changes in the Crash Rate within Colorado 6-lane SPF for all Crashes
CO6L-SPF
APMPY (Total)
120
110
Crash rate =
1.40 acc/MVMT
100
E
Crash rate =
1.56 acc/MVMT
90
D
80
APMPY
70
60
50
Crash rate =
1.32 acc/MVMT
40
30
20
Crash rate =
.85 acc/MVMT
10
Crash rate =
.64 acc/MVMT
0
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000 100,000 110,000 120,000 130,000 140,000 150,000 160,000 170,000 180,000 190,000 200,000
AADT
CO6L (Total)
APMPY (Total)
120
LOS B
or Better
LOS C
LOS D and E
LOS F
100
80
APMPY
60
40
20
0
40,000
Critical Density
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
AADT
160,000
180,000
200,000
CO6L (Total)
APMPY (Total)
120
LOS B
or Better
LOS C
LOS D and E
LOS F
Avg Acc Rate
1.45
100
Avg Acc Rate

0.75
APMPY
80
60
Avg Acc Rate

1.23
Avg Acc Rate

0.64
40
20
0
40,000
Critical Density
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
AADT
160,000
180,000
200,000
CO6L (INJ+FAT)
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
40
LOS B
or Better
35
LOS C
LOS D and E
30
LOS F
Avg Acc Rate

0.35
Avg Acc Rate

0.35
APMPY
25
20
Avg Acc Rate

0.23
Avg Acc Rate

0.23
15
10
0
40,000
Critical Density
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
AADT
160,000
180,000
200,000
26 Year Old Male

164 Lbs
Blood Pressure
110 Systolic
65 Diastolic
Does he have High Blood Pressure?
43 Year Old Male

264 Lbs
Blood Pressure
180 Systolic
100 Diastolic
Does he have High Blood Pressure?
110
65
180
100
Does anyone here have Training in

Internal Medicine or Cardiology?
Urban
4 Leg
6-Lane
Signalized
Fully Actuated
Mast Arm Signal Layout
Lighted
1997 to 2000
Mainline AADT = 51,000
Side Road AADT = 9,000
4 Year Crash History
PDO = 67
9.25 ( Inj Fat )
Per Year
INJ = 37
26 (Total )
FAT = 0
Do We Have a Safety Problem?
The Safety Performance Function of an

Intersection can be viewed Mathematically as
a 3-Dimensional Response Surface, where:
# Crashes/Year = ( AADTMainline, AADTSide Road )
Functional Form of SPF

Finding the Right Balance
Between Statistics, Traffic
Operations and Common Sense
.
DiExSys, LLC
HSM Graphical Form of the Intersection SPF for Multiple Vehicle

collisions on 991 Four-Leg Signalized Intersections
Colorado Intersection SPF Models Total Accidents

Total Accidents per Year
SPF Models from HSM

25.0
20.0
15.0
4,000 AADT Minor
10.0
5.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000

25.0
+1.5 SD
20.0
15.0
4,000 AADT Minor
10.0
-1.5 SD
5.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Colorado Intersection SPF Models INJ+FAT Accidents

INJ+FAT Accidents per Year
6.0
5.0
4.0
4,000 AADT Minor
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000

6.0
5.0
+1.5 SD
4.0
4,000 AADT Minor
3.0
2.0
-1.5 SD
1.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
SPF Models from HSM
SPF Response Surfaces and Slice Graph

25.0
6.0
5.0
20.0
4.0
15.0
4,000 AADT Minor
3.0
4,000 AADT Minor
10.0
2.0
5.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000

45.0
40.0
40,000 AADT Minor

36,000 AADT Minor
32,000 AADT Minor
35.0
28,000 AADT Minor

24,000 AADT Minor
30.0
20,000 AADT Minor

16,000 AADT Minor
25.0
12,000 AADT Minor

20.0
8,000 AADT Minor
15.0
4,000 AADT Minor
10.0
5.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
HSM Graphical Form of the Intersection SPF for Multiple Vehicle

collisions on 991 Four-Leg Signalized Intersections

12.0
10.0
40,000 AADT Minor

36,000 AADT Minor
32,000 AADT Minor
28,000 AADT Minor
8.0
24,000 AADT Minor

20,000 AADT Minor
6.0
16,000 AADT Minor

12,000 AADT Minor
8,000 AADT Minor
4.0
4,000 AADT Minor

2.0
0.0
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
HSM Two Lane Rural SPF
HSM Rural Multilane SPF
HSM Intersection SPF
Functional Form of Colorados 6-Lane and California 8-Lane Urban Freeway

SPFs
Generalized Linear Modeling (GLM) Power

Function
Neural Network (NN) Sigmoid or Maximizing
Log Likelihood (NB Distributional Assumption)
Sigmoid
GLM Power Function

(CO 6 Lane Injury & Fatality)
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
APMPY
(INJ+FAT)
40
35
30
APMPY
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
GLM Power Function

CO6Lane-GLM
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
40
35
30
APMPY
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
GLM Power Function CURE Plot

CO 6 Lane-GLM (Inj & Fat)
250
200
Cumulative Residual
150
100
50
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
-50
-100
-150
AADT
cumulative residual
- 2
200,000
Sigmoid Function
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
APMPY
(INJ+FAT)
40
35
30
APMPY
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
Sigmoid Function
CO6L-SPF
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
40
35
30
APMPY
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
Sigmoid Function
CO 6 Lane -SPF (Inj & Fat)
250
200
Cumulative Residual
150
100
50
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
-50
-100
-150
AADT
cum res fi
2 fi
- 2 fi
200,000
GLM vs. Sigmoid

CO6Lane-GLM
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
CO6L-SPF
40
35
35
30
30
25
25
APMPY
APMPY
40
20
15
20
15
10
10
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
50,000
100,000
AADT
200
200
150
150
100
50
0
100,000
150,000
200,000
Cumulative Residual
250
50,000
100
50
0
0
-50
-50
-100
-100
-150
50,000
100,000
-150
AADT
cumulative residual
200,000
CO 6 Lane -SPF (Inj & Fat)
250
150,000
AADT
CO 6 Lane-GLM (Inj & Fat)
Cumulative Residual
APMPY (INJ+FAT)
AADT
cum res fi
- 2
150,000
2 fi
- 2 fi
200,000
GLM Power Function

(CO 6 Lane Total)
APMPY
(Total)
APMPY
(Total)
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
GLM Power Function

(CO 6 Lane Total)
CO6Lane-GLM
APMPY (Total)
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000

(CO 6 Lane Total)
600
Cumulative Residual
400
200
50,000
100,000
150,000
-200
-400
-600
AADT
cumulative residual
- 2
200,000
Sigmoid Function
(CO 6 Total)
APMPY
(Total)
APMPY
(Total)
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
Sigmoid Function
(CO 6 Lane Total)
CO6L-SPF
APMPY (Total)
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
AADT
150,000
200,000
Sigmoid Function
(CO 6 Lane Total)
600
Cumulative Residual
400
200
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
-200
-400
-600
AADT
cum res tot
2 tot
- 2 tot
200,000
GLM vs. Sigmoid (CO 6 Lane Total)

APMPY (Total)
CO6L-SPF
180
160
160
140
140
120
120
100
100
APMPY
180
80
APMPY (Total)
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
50,000
AADT
600
600
400
400
200
50,000
100,000
150,000
-200
200,000
200,000
150,000
200,000
0
0
50,000
100,000
-200
-600
AADT
cumulative residual
150,000
200
-400
-400
-600
100,000
AADT
Cumulative Residual
Cumulative Residual
APMPY
CO6Lane-GLM
- 2
AADT
cum res tot
2 tot
- 2 tot
GLM Power Function

(CA 8 Lane Injury & Fatality)
50
45
40
35
APMPY
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
GLM Power Function

50
45
40
35
APMPY
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000

300
Cumulative Residual
200
100
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
-100
-200
-300
AADT
cumulative residual
- 2
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
50
45
40
35
APMPY
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
50
45
40
35
APMPY
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
300
Cumulative Residual
200
100
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
-100
-200
-300
AADT
cumulative residual
- 2
250,000
300,000
50
50
45
45
40
40
35
35
30
30
APMPY
APMPY
GLM vs. Sigmoid (CA 8 Lane Injury & Fatality)
25
20
25
20
15
15
10
10
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
50,000
100,000
300
300
200
200
100
0
0
50,000
100,000
200,000
250,000
200,000
250,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
-100
-200
300,000
100
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
-100
-200
-300
-300
AADT
AADT
cumulative residual
300,000
AADT
Cumulative Residual
Cumulative Residual
AADT
150,000
- 2
cumulative residual
- 2
300,000
GLM Power Function

(CA 8 Lane Total)
200
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
GLM Power Function

(CA 8 Lane Total)
200
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000

(CA 8 Lane Total)
800
600
Cumulative Residual
400
200
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
-200
-400
-600
-800
AADT
cumulative residual
- 2
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
(CA 8 Lane Total)
200
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
(CA 8 Lane Total)
200
180
160
140
APMPY
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
AADT
250,000
300,000
Sigmoid Function
(CA 8 Lane Total)
800
600
Cumulative Residual
400
200
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
-200
-400
-600
-800
AADT
cum res tot
2 tot
- 2 tot
250,000
300,000
GLM vs. Sigmoid (CA 8 Lane Total)
180
180
160
160
140
140
120
120
APMPY
200
APMPY
200
100
80
100
80
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
50,000
100,000
800
800
600
600
400
400
200
0
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
-200
250,000
300,000
250,000
300,000
0
0
50,000
100,000
-600
-600
-800
AADT
2
150,000
200,000
-200
-400
cumulative residual
200,000
200
-400
-800
150,000
AADT
Cumulative Residual
Cumulative Residual
AADT
- 2
AADT
cum res tot
2 tot
- 2 tot
250,000
300,000
Comparison of State Specific

SPFs
.
DiExSys, LLC
State Specific SPFs
State Specific SPFs
LADOTD
Developing State
Specific SPFs
DiExSys, LLC

S21 - Developing State Specific SPFs - LTC2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S21 - Developing State Specific SPFs - LTC2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LADOTD

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Lets Examine Its Application

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Average Rate = 2.28

Gambling Introduced In 1992

Average Rate = 1.24

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

After the Introduction of Gambling,

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Between 1990 and 2004

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Clearly the Rate is Changing with

In Order to Understand how the Crash

This Relationship is Reflected by,

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Rural 2-Lane Highway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Rural 2-Lane Highway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Rural 2-Lane Highway

14,000 AADT Corresponds to

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Urban 6-Lane Freeway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Urban 6-Lane Freeway

Each Point Represents

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Urban 6-Lane Freeway

Fit a Curve to the Data

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Urban 6-Lane Freeway

130,000 AADT Corresponds to

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

California 6-Lane Freeway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

California 8-Lane Freeway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Texas 8-Lane Freeway

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

56 Acc 1,000,000 1.28acc / mvmt

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

The Following Assumptions Typical of the Urban Freeway

DHV (Design Hourly Volume) =10 % of AADT for AADT <130,000

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Sigmoid Or Dose-Response Curve

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Avg Acc Rate

Avg Acc Rate

Avg Acc Rate

LADOTD Transportation Conference 2013

Avg Acc Rate

Avg Acc Rate

Avg Acc Rate

Avg Acc Rate